Company Ranking5 out of
Microsoft Corp. (Microsoft) provides stronger disclosure of its policies and programs for mitigating forced labor and human trafficking risks in its supply chain than many if its peers. The company ranks fifth on the benchmark overall, with its position driven by leading practices in supplier monitoring and its grievance mechanism, specifically for its suppliers’ workers. In addition, Microsoft demonstrates stronger risk assessment, traceability activities, and remedy programs, all of which are aimed at addressing forced labor risks in its supply chain. Microsoft is encouraged to report on its stakeholder engagement specifically as it relates to topics of human trafficking and forced labor. The company may also consider adopting and disclosing policies and practices related to recruitment in its supply chain. Furthermore, it is encouraged to improve efforts to engage and inform suppliers’ workers on their rights, and ensure supply chain workers’ voices are heard.
HOW DO THEY COMPARE?
The comparison tool allows companies' results to be easily compared. Up to two additional companies can be selected and compare against each other as shown below.
THEME & indicator score
The benchmark methodology has seven themes, selected to capture the key areas where companies need to take action to eradicate forced labour from their supply chains. The themes are comprised of a total of 12 key indicators. For each indicator, a company can score a total of 100 points.
Commitment and Governance
The company's top-level commitments on forced labor, supply chain standards, management processes, training programs and stakeholder engagement
|Awareness and Commitment||100 / 100|
|Supply Chain Standards||60 / 100|
|Management and Accountability||100 / 100|
|Training||100 / 100|
|Stakeholder Engagement||50 / 100|
Traceability and Risk Assessment
The extent to which the company traces its supply chain and conducts forced labor risk assessments, and discloses information about these processes.
|Traceability and Supply Chain Transparency||/ 100|
The company's awareness and action on purchasing practices that can exacerbate forced labor risks, and its process for selecting suppliers, integrating standards into contracts and cascading them down the supply chain.
|Purchasing Practices||0 / 100|
|Supplier Selection||50 / 100|
|Integration into Supplier Contracts||100 / 100|
|Cascading Standards Through the Supply Chain||50 / 100|
|Recruitment Approach||25 / 100|
|Recruitment Fees||50 / 100|
|Recruitment Audits||0 / 100|
The extent to which the company proactively communicates with workers through the supply chain, enables freedom of association and ensures access to effective and trusted grievance mechanisms.
|Communication of Policies||50 / 100|
|Worker Voice||0 / 100|
|Worker Empowerment||0 / 100|
|Grievance Mechanism||100 / 100|
The company's process for auditing (including whether it includes non-scheduled visits, document review, worker interviews) and disclosure about the audit process and findings.
|Auditing Process||100 / 100|
|Auditing Disclosure||60 / 100|
The extent to which the company has corrective action plans for non-compliant factories, as well as processes for remedying workers who are victims of forced labor, and reports on remedies provided.
|Corrective Action Plans||100 / 100|
|Remedy Programs||25 / 100|